RiceEating5.0

Was paging through some mags and found it interesting that both the GTO and the Solstice have the Mcpherson strut setup. This leads me to question whether GM might go with this on a 5th gen to cut cost and weight? Especially with the added cost/weight of something like an IRS. I guess there's always that possibility.

Having said that, Mcpherson strut can't be that bad if the suspension in general is setup/tuned right. Still, SLA would be better. For the fox chassis stangs, i believe there are SLA conversion kits so that was a potential fix (albiet aftermarket). I wonder if the SLA setup off the Lincolns LS would work????

AnthonyHSV

The new VE body will have the same as the CTS..(I think).

RiceEating5.0

SLA i take it?

Z284ever

RiceEating5.0,

The Solstice concept had struts, the Solstice production car has SLA.

http://web.camaross.com/forums/showt...hreadid=209462

crYnOid

I'm expecting SLA suspension in the VE. The commodore has been criticised for its handling compared to the falcon due to its older suspension. It was also believed at one stage that HSV was going to pull out the front mcpherson strut setup and put in their own SLA setup for their cars to improve handling. I hope the criticism that Holden have got locally get through

Pentatonic

I am one of those owners that doesn't care about handling all that much. Hell, my car is an auto.

I support the solid axle decision for the Mustang GT. Solid axles are easier to work with and weigh less. If I'm at the track, I sure don't care if it doesn't handle as good as the IRS. I'm sure a lot of the Mustang guys feel the same way.

dream '94 Z28

Those of us who define driving skill/fun as making turns and/while braking and putting down power want IRS.

The other group that defines driving skill/fun as driving in a straight line for 5-7 seconds want a solid axle.

I go back to the original argument, for the majority of the market driving in the real world on freeze/thaw cycle assulted streets, IRS can't be beat.

...and if you don't care how you car handles, why did you buy a sports car? Granted it looks good parked on the curb.....

ProudPony

OK...

I've watched this discussion go round full circle now. I just want to add some comments about the IRS/SLA/MPS comparisons...

A bump in the crown of an apex at WOT causes the rear to step out... Yup, dang sure does. And how many V6 buyers are going to have this happen to them?

Improved ride and handling characterisitics... definitely.
Again, how many penny-pinching high-school kids and college kids really care, and are willing to cough up another $1000 or so to have it in their basic V6 car or even the entry V8? I'd wager that most would pass on the IRS - even if it WERE available (me included) for the cost savings alone, but IF they spent extra money it would be for more motor, NOT an IRS system.

IRS in extreme HP situations is not very pretty. I realize some Callaway and Lingenfelter Vettes are very wild and maintain their IRS systems - great for them. Anybody here associate Lingenfelter or Callaway with cheapness? Low cost?
It is funny to me though why you don't see IRS on any NHRA rails or top fuel cars. These commercial race teams have money to burn and could choose whatever system they want, but stay with the ol' ring and stobs... for a reason.

Granted, you can break anything when abused the right way, but performance per pound per dollar, there is NO IRS SYSTEM ANYWHERE that will run 1/4's or 1/8's and live like a good live axle. For those of us who might go to the strip 2 or 3 times a month, and rack up 8-12 passes a night - it DOES matter.

And a personal note - Corvettes DO suffer from wheel-hop, I've seen it MANY times at the track myself. If you want to see it yourself, go to any street car event OR just rent the movie "Cannonball Run" and watch the red C4 (driven by Sammy Davis Jr and Dean Martin). There is a Nevada State Trooper after them in a Firebird, when the Vette does a 180 in the road. The wheels hopped like **** during braking for the 180 spin, then chirped/hopped like crazy when the driver nailed the gas taking off from a stop with the front wheels slightly turned. There's like 3 or 4 good shots of the C4 doing tire-smoking maneuvers, and the rear wheels are hopping in every shot - brakes OR accelerating.

Regardless, if you are suffering from wheel hop and want to stop it, it MUCH easier to do in a live axle system than an IRS unit, and we won't start talking about the aftermarket available for each, will we?

LAST POINT - Ford has knocked a MAJOR HOME RUN with the Mustang for the last 15 years by allowing the buyer to buy a new car for cheap, then modify it to suit the individual. I see the decision to stay with live axles as a continuation of that successful formula. They give you the platform to start from, you do what you want with it. There are aftermarket suspension kits available from basic bushing kits to full-blown conversions - front AND rear. If you want it and you got the cash... you're all set. If you DON'T WANT IT, you didn't have to pay for it ANYWAYS when you bought your base V6 unit because you had NO CHOICE. And that too is what Mustang has been all about since the beginning - choices... options... personalization of your car to your lifestyle.

For heaven's sake guys, the F-cars had the Mustang GT beat hands-down in the "performance" category for the last decade... but did it REALLY MATTER!?!? I've said before, I DON'T WANT to see the Mustang lineup turned into luxury-loaded, sweet-riding, pimped-up bunch of overpriced tech-mobiles - I WANT IT SIMPLE!!!
"People", that is "people en-masse", do not CARE about performance, I swear it, and the sales numbers prove it. IMO, about 97% of the people just want good economic value wrapped in a stylish exterior - but they DEMAND...
1)Practicality - live axle has it.
2)Cost - live axle has it.
3)Functionality - live axle has it.

Now, I'll turn right around and tell you that if I choose to buy a Mustang Boss 302 or some such car in the next couple of years, I would like to be able to get IRS on it - and I WILL if it is available. I also want them to keep IRS as an option for the upscale cars like Cobra that can best utilize the system and where costs don't really matter. And the best suggestion I've heard yet is for Ford to simply make it optional on any Mustang at added cost, then the public could justify the demand.

As for Camaro, if you insist on bringing it back with mandatory IRS on all models, I think you'd be making a big mistake. In such a cut-throat market segment as the sportscar/ponycar market is becomming, with import pressures to boot, adding mandatory cost to the base models without visual impact or noticeable improvement is unwise IMO. Do you REALLY want to market a car with the slogan "...ours comes with IRS, unavailable on the base Mustang."?
How about "...ours has 335 horsepower, unavailable on the GT.", that sold really well now, didn't it?
Or maybe "...ours has SLA front suspension, not available on the Mustang.", that one shoulda sold 100k units alone... but didn't.
Don't you guys get it? The average Joe doesn't care! It's the styling, the daily usefullness, and the monthly payment that wins out in the battle for car sales volume.

Rant over. Appologies to those who may be offended at my stance and rhetoric. I just think the persuit of the best performance available has jaded the eyes of us enthusiasts, causing us to loose clear sight of what has made the Mustang so successful for so long... simplicity and cost of the basic cars - plain and simple.

Look no further than right here in this very forum... the Ford guys are pretty much happy with it, the GM guys maybe 50/50. Just verifies that Ford gave us what we asked for (or wanted)... again.

ProudPony

Can't be beat how?

In COST?
In Maintainability?
In Servicing?
In ability to Modify?
In Durability?

Or in RIDE QUALITY?

PS - not much freeze/thaw going on in Phoenix!
But your point is WELL MADE.

dream '94 Z28

For years we have all pretty much agreed on that the Mustang has out sold the F-twins because they were MORE COMFORTABLE in everydy driving.

So now we want chevy to put on an archiac mechanical device on the next Z which we've all agreed on does not give you the same ride quality as a solid axle? Hmmm, that doesn't equal sales to me.

And as far as if penny pinching high schoolers will shell out another $1000 for IRS, I don't know how many peeny pinching high schoolers are buying new cars to begin with, let alone can afford the high insurance premiums a high schooler in a sports car will bring. That hasn't been the target audience for awhile now!

And back at ya, if you're dumping all that money to make you car go blazingly fast ina straight line, what it to you to drop another $500-$1000 on a solid axle swap.

Of course, I am hedge my bet a little to see how the new 'Stang actuall feels and performs.

But my $0.02 is still wagered for IRS.

Darth Xed

And these cars are not driven on the street...

Real World condition make this comparison almost useless unles you are buying your new car strictly to be run on 1/4 mile tracks.

Z28Wilson

NHRA doesn't use OHC motors either. Guess that means pushrod V8's are the way to go for "total performance."

Sorry Mustang guys, because they use large displacement, 16 valve pushrod V8's your little 4.6 won't have any success in drag racing! Kinda puts things in perspective, no?

See, here's the thing. I'm all for keeping things simple, but an independent rear suspension doesn't have to be "more complicated", or (much) more costly, or weigh much more. It's just like you said, if most people don't know or don't care about what suspension setup their new pony car has why would you then assume they'd go for the solid axle Mustang all the time, assuming comparable models are just a few hundred dollars apart? You don't think maybe Camaro may have some cool features or a favorable interior layout to the Mustang, cost-free, that would help sway buyers?

The Camaro has had to live with the sigma of being a "low tech brute" for as long as I can remember. Mustang for the most part hasn't had that problem ( ).....I firmly believe that to be taken seriously by all enthusiasts against not JUST the Mustang but the other gammut of sporty cars from Japan and Germany the Camaro needs a 21st-century suspension.

90rocz

Anyways, from what I'm reading, the LS2 C6 "IS" getting "Varible Valve Timing" in the form of "2" camshafts "in the block", one operating the Intake, the other operating the Exhaust.(remaining OHV)
Unless they made a last minute change in plans I didn't hear about..
And my point about the Vette competing with Ford and Dodges' premiums; Motor Trend wouldn't even test the '04 Vette with them stating to the effect that in present form, it just wasn't even in the running...adding that if they hold onto plans for the 6.0L LS2 they might do another shootout next year..
BTW they got like 3.6 to 3.9 second 0-60 times for the Viper RT10 and the GT40 and 1/4 times of 11.70's right at 124mph!..(Very close..Both pushing the 500HP mark.)
I personally think the GT40 owns the Viper in the looks department, and I'd like to see a Top Speed comparison.

But anyways, RIGHT HERE, is where the Vette should be competing, in their price range, where they would be the better choice. And I believe the C6 in a Z06 version should be competitive especially with a 475-500HP version...(Cause 405HP ain't gonna do it..)

(GTO tested = 0-60 5.3seconds and 13.57 I believe was the 1/4.
Mitsu Evo = 0-60 5.0 secs and 13.50 1/4...)

ProudPony

ProudPony

I was eluding to running 2000+ hp through an IRS system.
Even 1200hp.
Those guys know that live axles are durable and strong, and far less complex.
KISS principle in action.

I wasn't referencing driving a top fuel car on the road.

Work with me here Darth! Show me some love!